300c convertible is here

NAh still like the current 300
"MoPar Man" > wrote in message
...
> KaWallski wrote:
>
> > After I followed that link and discovered the pix for the convert..
> >
> > That body was MADE to be offered as a ragtop.
>
> Not as much as this was:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/46mlc
> http://tinyurl.com/4w75h
> http://tinyurl.com/56gt9
> http://tinyurl.com/4fqz2
> http://tinyurl.com/6lrlm
> http://tinyurl.com/6t4ce
> http://tinyurl.com/3rrfp

I won't to see one done buy the overhauling team. I like the Lexus
IS430 they made for lexus, Chrysler should let them make a 300c
convertible without all the TV's and bondo. I can't believe people with
all that money go to this cheap body shop to do work on there cars.

"N8N" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Alex Rodriguez wrote:
> >
> > > >They've just been sued by the DOT for replacing a drivers side
> airbag
> > > >with a TV screen. You've got to give them credit for that one, if
> > > >you're going to be irresponsible don't do it in a little way, do
> > > >something fantastically idiotic.
> >
> > > Huh? I for one would not miss the explosive device in my steering
> > > wheel.
> >
> > Well, of course, and you as a vehicle owner have the right to remove,
> > deactivate or disable the airbag(s) in your own vehicle(s), unless
> your
> > state has a law against same. But, it's FEDERALLY illegal for any
> > professional (=mechanic, bodyman, TV network exec, etc.) to remove,
> > disable, modify in such a way as to render noncompliant, or render
> > inoperative any device, system or design feature required by Federal
> Motor
> > Vehicle Safety Standards.
> >
> > Civil penalties are up to $5k per violation up to a max of $15m
> *plus*
> > another up-to-$15m for company principals who ought to have known
> better.
>
> Well, since they're clearly not professionals I bet this suit will get
> thrown out.
>
> nate
>
Nope,, http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/
Two vehicle customizing firms agreed to pay a total of $21,000 for removal
of drivers' side air bags. NHTSA charged both West Coast Customs of
Inglewood, CA, and Unique Autosports of Uniondale, NY, with removal of air
bags to install video monitors in the steering wheel. Federal law prohibits
companies from removing mandated safety equipment

Makes you wonder if the insurance company won't pay for injuries should the
individual require medical attention.

--
"Now Phoebe Snow direct can go
from thirty-third to Buffalo.
From Broadway bright the tubes run right
Into the Road of Anthracite"




"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Alex Rodriguez wrote:
>
>> >They've just been sued by the DOT for replacing a drivers side airbag
>> >with a TV screen. You've got to give them credit for that one, if
>> >you're going to be irresponsible don't do it in a little way, do
>> >something fantastically idiotic.
>
>> Huh? I for one would not miss the explosive device in my steering
>> wheel.
>
> Well, of course, and you as a vehicle owner have the right to remove,
> deactivate or disable the airbag(s) in your own vehicle(s), unless your
> state has a law against same. But, it's FEDERALLY illegal for any
> professional (=mechanic, bodyman, TV network exec, etc.) to remove,
> disable, modify in such a way as to render noncompliant, or render
> inoperative any device, system or design feature required by Federal Motor
> Vehicle Safety Standards.
>
> Civil penalties are up to $5k per violation up to a max of $15m *plus*
> another up-to-$15m for company principals who ought to have known better.

On 27 Jan 2005 12:17:44 GMT, (Vilfrard8) puked:

>For all who what a 300c what the brains blowin out hip hop for convertible,from
>the people who brought us pimp my ride.How come they can do it but chrysler
>can't. It looks nice but i don't trust the
>quality.http://westcoastcustoms.com/Home/Pages/index.htm

BTW, conspicuous by its absence was a picture of the top up. I'm
guessing there is none...

--
lab~rat >:-)
The less you care, the more it doesn't matter.

In article >, ks says...
>Alex Rodriguez wrote:
>> In article >, ks says...
>>>TVs don't belong in cars, PERIOD.
>> Spoken like someone who does not have young children. TV's are appropriate
>> when used by passengers, not the driver.
>
>Actually, I do. But having passengers read a book is a lot less
>distracting than a prattling TV in the back seat.

Newer units have wireless headsets, so you would not be distracted by
kids watching movies in the back seat. Reading is also a great way to
keep kids occupied, but having more than one option is a good idea.
----------------
Alex